Women's rights general conversations - Thread 3

<Puts crisp £5 note on option 2>

It appears that the Welsh Assembly has looked at the mess that Scotland has made of self-id and decided to have a go themselves. I wonder if they’ll learn anything from the public reaction to the Scottish debate or go full out for a “hold my beer” approach.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-64548844.amp

*Strip club policy

Happy to clarify that the council is not running its own strip clubs yet.

Interesting that BCP’s strip club has been ruled unlawful because it failed to consider sex equality impacts:

www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/news/23302311.bcp-councils-strip-club-policy-adoption-decision-unlawful/

SDPOs remind me very much of South African banning orders. The legislation appears so loosely worded that merely tweeting "good luck" could get one perma-banned. The police (those who seem unable to spot killers and rapists in the ranks) get to decide what you can and can't do.

carried out (or contributed to another person carrying out) activities relating to at least two protests

Nothing there about 'violent' or 'disruptive' protests.

Standing silently with a sign is a protest. Giving someone a piece of cardboard that they make into the sign is contributing to that activity.

I've been to protests that were poetry readings in bookshops - organised by the bookshop owner, after closing time. In nobody's way, but still a protest.

Even signing a petition could be seen as encouraging - and therefore contributing to - any demonstration about the same cause.

As Mach says, this covers anyone who raises any objection to anything.

The anti-Brexit marches were completely peaceful, and nobody glued themseleves to anything, but were disruptive protests. I stood outside city hall to protest against the prorogation of parliament - there were 2 speeches, no chanting, no counter-protest, and it was a wide bit of pavement so people could walk round us without having to step into the road. But it was a protest. I could easily be given one of these orders.

There's always mission creep. The powers are sweeping. It will end in tears.

I think the intention of that law is to stop serious disruption of the type that blocks motorways and significantly disrupts people going about their normal business.

The problem is that after a few years it could easily be argued that serious disruption is blocking a public square with a large demonstration requiring police support.

After all, the GRA was definitely absolutely only relevant to a tiny number of people with a diagnosis of gender dysphoria and even changing someone's legal sex "for all purposes" had limits. Yet here we are with Sturgeon insisting that the important thing about a rapist is that "she" is an individual.

I have to say I am loving the pics and reporting of Kellie Jay Keen's demo on Sunday. And the atmosphere at the pub after looks amazing.

twitter.com/roseveniceallan/status/1622303749187244038?s=20&t=LfIat8uiVRCeIsBvXYIlVg

Yes and even if it's supposed to be aimed at Just Stop Oil etc, they'll misuse it against ordinary protesters; just look at how councils used the Prevention of Terrorism Act to snoop on people trying to get their kids into better schools.

Im hoping a get together in a square or park would not constitute “Serious disruption”. Surely that refers to blocking roads/bridges etc.

It's aimed at everybody.

Maybe I’m being naive, but that reads more as if it is aimed at people glueing themselves to motorways and tube trains, rather than assembling in a public place having notified the police as KJK does. Still looks to be a shitty variant of PSPO or ASBO though. Don’t like them, but think unless FWS or SFW start using Just Stop Oil or XR tactics Women’s Rights campaigners have little to fear.

Gaaaah!

"put an end", not "out an end".

Here's something that could pretty much out an end to TERFy protest. It's so widely drawn and I can't see the cops not using it, especially against KJK.

Part 2 of this Bill introduces a new civil order – Serious Disruption Prevention Orders (SDPOs) – that can be imposed on individuals who have carried out (or contributed to another person carrying out) activities relating to at least two protests within a five-year period, whether or not they have been convicted of a crime.[9] They can last anywhere from one week to two years, with the potential to be renewed indefinitely...

...It is difficult to imagine a situation where someone’s actions would not somehow fall within the conditions under which someone could be given an SDPO

www.statewatch.org/news/2023/january/uk-stop-the-public-order-bill/

The easy way to get rid of him is to start having some nuance and to stop accepting the whole pseudoscientific gender ideology bullshit as troooot. He'd be off before they'd finished typing "Maybe JKR isn't completely wrong after all."

It's not really something to joke about, but it is funny in a way, the Graun floundering about, high-viz departures making a stir, unfortunate timing of Isla making their position look even drafter, events...

Some great gotchas in the responses too. I wonder if the poster might be onto something who suggested the G might be flying a kite to unload OJ.

The Graun would like some help with their research, Twitter is being most obliging: www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4737242-guardian-asking-for-experiences-of-internet-misogyny

That looks useful. Bookmarked for future reference.

Haven't rtft but I've just started a thread on the EHRC and section 23 orders and it occurred to me that this thread would be a better place to post this info.

www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/our-work/blogs/using-section-23-agreements-help-organisations-improve-their-approach-equality

I had never heard of these Orders. Could be a method of enforcing equality law compliance without the expense and stress of going to court. So many threads on this board are concerned with policies or problems in the workplace (pronouns, toilets, training courses, etc) and this could be an alternative route to a fair resolution. I'm not sure if their remit covers all equality legislation or just the EA2010. The language suggests yes in some places, but I haven't found anything that says so in terms.

The EHRC say:
We are a prescribed whistleblowing organisation, so if an employee has information that their employer is breaching equality law they can report their concerns to us.

From what I can see, all you have to do is provide credible evidence of possible breaches of EA2010 and the EHRC take it from there. Much less daunting than a Tribunal and you don't have to take on your own HR department personally or put your head above the parapet (unless it's such a small workforce that you would out yourself anyway, I suppose).

As I said above, I haven't rtft so apologies if someone else has already posted this.

Silly me! Of course that's how it happened.

Thank you, as always, for the assist.😀

Boiledbeetle · Yesterday 19:21

How far are they going with this? I mean are terfs responsible yet for him raping two women?

Well, of course! Don't you know that a gang of TERFs held him down over the two victims and forced Viagra down his throat?

Happy 'Representation of the People Act (1918)' day.

On 6 February, 105 years ago, 8.5 million women in the UK won the vote (only those who were over 30, and who owned property or had a degree). It took another 10 years to get equal voting rights to men.

ughhhh can't they just give it a rest?

Is DFAB the new AFAB? Not sure I’ve heard of ‘nonbinary people with vaginas’ either.